ai-job-search/.claude/commands/outcome.md

# /outcome - Record the Result of an Application

You are recording what happened to a job application: progress updates (interview invitations, stages completed, offers) and final resolutions (hired, rejected, no response). The data lands in two places the framework already reads but nothing systematically writes:

- `job_search_tracker.csv` - the status column that `/scrape` and `/rank` use for dedup and exclusion
- `documents/applications/<company>_<role>/` - the per-application archive (posting, submitted drafts, `outcome.md`) that `/setup` Path A mines to calibrate `04-job-evaluation.md` and surface STAR candidates

`/outcome` writes the data; `/setup` interprets it. This command never edits the evaluation framework or profile files itself.

The command also owns the stretch *before* there is an outcome to record: the **follow-up branch** (Step 2b) surfaces open applications that have gone quiet, drafts a brief follow-up note in the user's voice, and logs it - so the chase and the resolution it eventually leads to live in one flow.

Follow these steps **in order**.

---

## Step 0: Parse Input

`$ARGUMENTS` may contain:

- Nothing → list open applications and ask which one to update
- A company name (optionally with a role), e.g. `/outcome acme` or `/outcome acme ml engineer` → target that application
- `followup` → enter the follow-up branch (Step 2b) over every quiet open application, using the default threshold of **10 days**
- `followup <N>`, e.g. `/outcome followup 14` → follow-up branch with an N-day threshold
- `followup <company>`, e.g. `/outcome followup acme` → draft a follow-up for that application now, regardless of threshold
- `stale` or `sweep` → enter the stale application sweep branch (Step 2c) over open applications quiet for **60+ days**
- `stale <N>` or `sweep <N>`, e.g. `/outcome stale 90` → stale sweep branch with an N-day threshold

---

## Step 1: Load State and Identify the Application

1. Read `job_search_tracker.csv`. If it does not exist, create it with the standard header:
   ```
   date,company,sector,role,role_type,channel,status,contact_person,fit_rating,notes,cv_file,cover_letter_file,source,deadline
   ```
   **If the file exists and its header does not end in `,deadline`, append `,deadline` to the header line only** - no data row is touched. Legacy rows then read as an empty deadline. This is the one edit to an existing tracker this command may make outside a matched row, and Step 4's "never restructure the CSV" governs that row, not this header line.
2. **With an argument:** match rows case-insensitively on company (and role, if given). One match → proceed. Several → list them and ask. None → the application was made outside the workflow; collect company, role, date applied, channel, and posting URL from the user and add a tracker row.
3. **Without an argument:** list all rows whose status is not final (see **Tracker status vocabulary** below) as a numbered table (company, role, date applied, current status, deadline, days quiet, follow-ups sent) and ask which to update. The two derived columns come straight from existing data: **days quiet** counts from the row's `date` or the latest dated entry in `notes`, whichever is more recent; **follow-ups sent** counts the `followed up YYYY-MM-DD` markers in `notes`. If any open row is 10+ days quiet with fewer than two follow-ups sent, add one line under the table: "Some of these have gone quiet - want a follow-up draft? (Step 2b)". If any open rows are 60+ days quiet, also offer: "You have applications quiet for 60+ days — run `/outcome stale` to batch-resolve them (Step 2c)." If every row is resolved, say so and stop.

   **`drafted` rows are listed but never counted as quiet** - nothing was sent, so nobody is late replying. List them under their own heading ("Drafted, not yet submitted"), leave **days quiet** and **follow-ups sent** blank, and keep them out of the follow-up offer above.

   **Deadline urgency is the one clock that does apply to a drafted row.** Show the `deadline` column when the row has one and leave it blank otherwise. Mark a deadline within 7 days with 🔥 and one that has already passed with ⚠, on the same 7-day threshold `/rank` Step 3 uses so the two commands never disagree. A passed deadline on a `drafted` row is the failure this column exists to catch - documents written, never sent, and now unsendable - so name it in one line under the table rather than leaving the user to compare dates. This changes nothing about the follow-up offer: a drafted row is still never chased, because nobody is late replying to something that was never sent.

4. Derive the archive folder name: `documents/applications/<company>_<role>/` by the **Subfolder naming** rule in `documents/README.md`. Check whether the folder and an `outcome.md` already exist - if so, you are updating, not creating.

---

## Tracker status vocabulary

Canonical spellings for the tracker CSV `status` column (underscores, never spaces):

`drafted` | `applied` | `interview` | `offer` | `hired` | `rejected` | `no_response` | `offer_declined` | `withdrawn`

- **Final** (application closed): `hired`, `rejected`, `no_response`, `offer_declined`, `withdrawn`
- **Open**: everything else, `drafted` included — a row is active until its status is one of the **Final** values.
- **`drafted`** is open but distinct — nothing was sent, so no follow-up is ever due.
- Readers must also accept the legacy space spellings `no response` and `offer declined` on read, so that existing trackers keep working without a migration. Never write them — they are the same values as `no_response` and `offer_declined`, not separate statuses, equally **Final**, and every rule that names one applies to the other.

> Distinct from the archive `Status:` enum in `documents/README.md`
> (`in_progress` | `hired` | `offer_declined` | `rejected` | `no_response` | `interview_only`),
> which describes the per-application `outcome.md` file, not this column. The two enums
> are never written to the same field.

---

## Step 2: Collect What Happened

Ask the user what happened, then classify:

**Progress updates** (application still open):
- Interview invitation / stage scheduled or completed (phone screen, technical, case, final round)
- Offer received (not yet accepted or declined)

**Resolutions** (application closed) — these map to the archive `Status:` enum in `documents/README.md` that `/setup` parses (distinct from the tracker CSV column; see **Tracker status vocabulary** above):
- `hired` - accepted an offer
- `offer_declined` - received an offer, turned it down
- `rejected` - explicit rejection at any stage
- `no_response` - no reply; if the user is unsure whether to call it, note how long it has been since the last contact and let them decide - do not impose a cutoff
- `interview_only` - reached interviews but the process stalled or was abandoned without an explicit rejection

Also collect, without interrogating - one or two open questions are enough:
- Dates for the stages reached
- Any feedback received, verbatim where the user remembers it
- What they'd do differently, and any signal about what the company valued (these feed `/setup`'s calibration and STAR-candidate mining, so concrete beats polished)

---

## Step 2b: Follow-Up Branch (chase a quiet application)

Enter this branch from the `followup` argument (Step 0) or from the offer under the open-pipeline table (Step 1.3). Standard practice is a brief, polite follow-up one to two weeks after applying, at most twice; this branch operationalizes that.

**Candidates.** An application qualifies when its status is neither final nor `drafted`, the threshold has passed since its `date` (or since the last `followed up` marker in `notes`, if any), and it has fewer than **two** logged follow-ups. Parse dates defensively - skip rows whose dates do not parse and say so rather than guessing. Present qualifying applications as a table (company, role, days quiet, follow-ups sent, channel, contact person) and draft only for the ones the user picks.

**Threshold.** The 10-day default is deliberately earlier than `/gmail-sync`'s 30-day staleness flag (its Step 9): that check is a read-only alarm that a row has been forgotten entirely; this branch is the proactive nudge while a reply is still plausible. The two numbers serve different moments, which is why they differ.

**Drafting.** For each selected application:

1. Read the archive folder: the `job_posting.md`, `cv_draft.tex`, and `cover_letter.tex` that Step 3 maintains are the source of **every claim** the note may make - this is Rule 3 (never fabricate) widened to "no new claims": a follow-up that introduces skills or experience the submitted materials don't contain is a fabrication vector.
2. Apply the writing style rules from `03-writing-style.md` (no cliches, no em-dashes, warm but direct), and match the application's language - draw the register from the archived cover letter.
3. Write roughly **60 to 120 words**: address the `contact_person` from the tracker if present (otherwise the team, in the application's language); one sentence restating interest in the specific role; one concrete value-reminder drawn from the submitted materials; one polite question about the timeline. No pressure, no "just checking in" filler.
4. Shape it for the `channel` column: email (with a subject line reusing the application's headline), LinkedIn message (shorter, no subject), or portal message (plain text).
5. Present the draft and iterate until the user is happy.

**Logging.** Once the user confirms they will send it (or have sent it), log it in the same turn - an unlogged follow-up breaks the next run's quiet-days math:

- Append `followed up YYYY-MM-DD` to the row's `notes` column (Step 4's rule applies: append a dated note, never restructure the CSV).
- Save the final note as `followup_YYYY-MM-DD.md` in the application's archive folder. Safe by documented convention: `/setup` reads only the four named archive files and ignores extras (the same rule that covers `/interview`'s prep files), and `documents/applications/**` is gitignored personal data.

If the user decides not to send, log nothing.

**Termination.** When an application hits two follow-ups and stays silent, do not offer a third. This is the moment to continue in this same command's Step 2: note how long it has been since last contact and let the user decide whether to record `no_response` - as ever, no imposed cutoff. And if the user mentions an actual response while in this branch (an interview invitation, a rejection), drop out of the branch and record it through the normal Step 2 flow.

---

## Step 2c: Stale Sweep Branch (batch-resolve quiet applications)

Enter this branch from the `stale` or `sweep` argument (Step 0), or from the suggestion under the open-pipeline table in Step 1.3. In an extended job hunt, applications that received no response accumulate and clutter the tracker, `/html-report` funnel metrics, and `/notion-sync`. This branch operationalizes batch-cleaning old quiet applications while keeping the user in full control.

**Candidates.** An application qualifies when its tracker `status` is open and submitted (`applied` or `interview`), the threshold has passed since its `date` (or since the latest dated entry in `notes`, whichever is more recent), and its status is neither final nor `drafted` (`drafted` applications were never submitted and cannot receive a response). Parse dates defensively — skip unparseable rows with a note.

**Threshold.** The default threshold is **60 days** quiet. If the user specified an integer `<N>` (e.g. `/outcome stale 90` or `/outcome sweep 45`), use N days instead.

**Presentation.** If no open applications exceed the threshold, report:
> "No open applications exceed the <N>-day quiet threshold. Your tracker is up to date!"
and stop.

Otherwise, present qualifying applications as a numbered table:

```
## Stale Applications ([K] quiet for [N]+ days)

| # | Company | Role | Date Applied | Days Quiet | Follow-ups Sent | Current Status | Proposed Status |
|---|---------|------|--------------|------------|-----------------|----------------|-----------------|
| 1 | Acme    | SWE  | 2026-05-10   | 118        | 2               | applied        | no_response     |
| 2 | Beta    | MLE  | 2026-06-01   | 96         | 1               | applied        | no_response     |
```

Then ask:

> **How would you like to resolve these applications?**
>
> - **`all`** — Mark all [K] applications as `no_response` and update archives
> - **`select`** — Specify which numbers to resolve (e.g. "1, 3" or "1-4")
> - **`skip`** — Cancel without making any changes

Wait for the user's explicit response before writing anything.

**Execution.** For each application the user confirms:

1. **Update Tracker:** update the row's `status` column to `no_response` (using the canonical spelling from **Tracker status vocabulary**). Append `stale resolved no_response (YYYY-MM-DD)` to `notes`. Follow Step 4's rule: never restructure the CSV, preserve all other columns intact.
2. **Update Archive:** derive `documents/applications/<company>_<role>/` per the **Subfolder naming** rule. If the folder exists, update or write `outcome.md` with:
   - `**Status:** no_response`
   - `**Date resolved:** YYYY-MM-DD`
   - Append to `## Notes`: `- Stale resolution: marked no_response after [N] days quiet (YYYY-MM-DD)`

**Calibration Handoff.** If 3 or more applications were resolved in this sweep, continue to Step 5 to offer calibration handoff. Otherwise present a summary of resolved applications and stop.

---

## Step 3: Archive the Application Materials

Create or update `documents/applications/<company>_<role>/`. All content here is personal data - the folder is already gitignored (`documents/applications/**`), so nothing needs redacting.

1. **`cv_draft.tex` and `cover_letter.tex`** - copy (never move) the submitted files. Locate them via the tracker row's `cv_file`/`cover_letter_file` columns; if those are empty, look for `cv/main_<company>_<role>.*` and `cover_letters/cover_<company>_<role>.*`, deriving `<company>_<role>` by the **Subfolder naming** rule in `documents/README.md`. **Never widen those globs to the company alone** - two roles at one company both match it, and the first hit wins silently. If a file already exists in the archive, leave it - the archived version is what was actually submitted. If nothing matches (application made outside `/apply`), skip with a note rather than widening the search: a sibling role's CV recorded as what you submitted is worse than no file at all.
2. **`job_posting.md`** - if it already exists, leave it. Otherwise try WebFetch on the tracker row's `source` URL, retrying a 403 with browser headers per `.claude/skills/job-application-assistant/09-web-research.md`, run the result through `python3 tools/posting_guard.py` (`--html` on a saved page, `--text` otherwise) and save the **cleaned** text plus a `## posting_guard` section with the verdict and finding counts only, exactly as `/apply` Step 6b does. If the URL is dead (postings expire fast - this is exactly why the archive matters), ask the user to paste the posting, or write a stub noting the posting is unavailable. **Never reconstruct a posting from memory.**
3. **`outcome.md`** - write or update it in exactly the format documented in `documents/README.md`, so `/setup` Path A parses it without special cases:

```markdown
# Outcome: <Company> — <Role>

**Status:** in_progress | hired | offer_declined | rejected | no_response | interview_only

**Date resolved:** YYYY-MM-DD   <- only when resolved; omit while in_progress

## Interview stages reached
- [x] Phone screen (YYYY-MM-DD)
- [ ] Technical interview
- [ ] Case interview
- [ ] Final round
- [ ] Offer received

## Notes
<feedback received, what to do differently, signals about what they valued -
appended per update with a date, never overwritten>
```

Update rules: tick stage checkboxes as they are reached (add the date in parentheses), append dated entries to Notes, and only change `Status` from `in_progress` to a final value on resolution. Re-running `/outcome` on the same application is idempotent - it appends new information, never duplicates or rewrites history.

**Thank-you note trigger:** when this step ticks a newly completed interview stage, offer in the same turn: "Want a short thank-you note for the interviewer? A prompt one is standard practice." If accepted, draft it under Step 2b's drafting and logging rules (same voice, same no-new-claims boundary, same `followup_YYYY-MM-DD.md` archive convention). Recording the stage is the trigger - no scanning for recent stages is ever needed.

---

## Step 4: Update the Tracker

Update the matched row's `status` column using the canonical spellings from **Tracker status vocabulary** above (e.g. `drafted` → `applied` → `interview` → `offer` → `hired` / `rejected` / `no_response` / `offer_declined` / `withdrawn`) and append a short dated note to the `notes` column, **containing no commas, double quotes or line breaks**. No writer here emits a quoted tracker field, so a comma in the note shifts `cv_file`, `cover_letter_file` and `source` a column left for `csv.DictReader` (`tools/rank_state.py`) as much as for a naive split, and a line break ends the row - `rejected, no feedback given` is exactly the sentence that corrupts it; write `rejected - no feedback given`. `/gmail-sync` Step 7a applies the same rule to the email subjects it appends. Never restructure the CSV, reorder rows, or touch other rows. The rewrite touches only the `status` and `notes` columns: preserve every other field of the row, parsed or not, so a value the row carries - the `deadline` written by `/apply` Step 6b, or any column added in the future - is never blanked by a status update.

**Moving a row off `drafted`:** rows written by `/apply` Step 6b carry the date the documents were drafted, not the date they were sent. Whenever this step advances such a row to any other status - `applied`, or straight to `interview` or `rejected` when the user reports an outcome for something they submitted without recording it - overwrite its `date` column with the actual submission date. The `date` column is read as "applied on" by `/notion-sync` and drives `/html-report`'s year/season grouping and this command's own days-quiet count, so leaving the draft date in place would misreport the application.

---

## Step 5: Calibration Handoff

Count the `outcome.md` files under `documents/applications/` with a **final** status (not `in_progress`).

- If 3 or more are resolved (or 2+ share a pattern - same role type rejected twice, same sector going silent), suggest:
  > "You now have <N> resolved applications on record. Run `/setup` (Path A) to fold them into your evaluation framework - it calibrates fit scoring from what actually got interviews, and mines your interview feedback for STAR examples."
- Do **not** write anything into `04-job-evaluation.md` or other skill files yourself. `/setup` Path A owns that merge - it is read-before-write and idempotent, and duplicating its logic here would race it.

---

## Step 6: Confirm

Summarize what was recorded:

> **Outcome recorded for <Role> at <Company>.**
>
> - `documents/applications/<company>_<role>/outcome.md` - status: <status>, <what changed>
> - Archived: <which of cv_draft.tex / cover_letter.tex / job_posting.md were copied or fetched, and which were skipped and why>
> - Tracker: status → <new status>
>
> [Calibration suggestion from Step 5, if triggered]

If the update recorded an upcoming or newly scheduled interview stage, also suggest:

> "Interview coming up? `/interview <company>` builds a prep pack for that stage from this application's archive - the posting, the documents you submitted, and any feedback recorded from earlier rounds."

If the recorded status is `hired`, congratulate the user warmly first - this is the moment the whole framework exists for. Then add this single line (once; never on re-runs for the same application, and never for any other status):

> "If this framework helped you get there, consider [buying it a coffee](https://ko-fi.com/madslorentzen) - it keeps this free for the next job-seeker out there. ☕"

---

## Important Rules

1. **Write data, don't interpret it.** The archive and tracker are the outputs; calibration belongs to `/setup`. This command never edits profile or framework files.
2. **The archived version is the submitted version.** Existing files in the application folder are never overwritten by fresher drafts.
3. **Never fabricate.** A dead posting URL gets a user-pasted copy or an explicit "unavailable" stub, not a reconstruction. Feedback is recorded as the user reports it.
4. **Stay schema-compatible.** `outcome.md` follows the format in `documents/README.md` exactly (`in_progress` is the one addition, for open applications); the tracker keeps its columns.
5. **Idempotent updates.** Re-running on the same application appends new stages and notes; it never duplicates folders, rows, or history.
6. **Follow-ups: draft only, never send.** The follow-up branch produces text for the user to send themselves. It never emails, messages, or submits anything, and it must not be wired to tools that do.
7. **Follow-ups: no new claims.** Every substantive statement in a follow-up or thank-you note comes from the archived submitted materials. Rule 3 applies with no exceptions.
8. **Maximum two follow-ups per application.** After the second silent follow-up, the honest move is recording the resolution, not persistence.
9. **Stale sweep: user confirms before writing.** The stale sweep branch never marks applications as no_response automatically. It always presents the qualifying candidate list and waits for explicit user confirmation (all, select, or skip).