agentleFS
DexterslabAiDexterslabAi/resume-genie/skills/cv-tailor/SKILL.md

cv-tailor

Skill0 starsChanged 19 days agoMITView on GitHub

Rewrite a CV for one specific job while keeping it 100% truthful. Uses the advert's language, achievement-focused bullets and placeholders instead of invented numbers, and runs an automated fabrication check before delivering a Word file in a chosen template and regional format. Use when the user asks to tailor, rewrite, improve or optimise their CV or resume for a role.

12 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

6 rules. 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 11 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 4

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 2

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Experience: keep every role and date. Put the most relevant bullets first.

    line 18
  2. Very specific:

    Numbers: only the user's own. Otherwise use [placeholders] with needs_confirmation: true.

    line 19
  3. Distinctive:

    Verify, and fix the output until the fabrication check is clean:

    line 22
  4. Distinctive:

    Never invent or upgrade employers, titles, dates, tools, qualifications or results.

    line 39
  5. Very specific:

    Never deliver a CV that fails check_fabrication.py.

    line 40
  6. Distinctive:

    Keep layouts ATS-safe: one column, standard headings, contact details in the body.

    line 41

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 11 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

CV tailor

Tailoring is editing, not inventing. Choose, order and reword the candidate's real experience for this one job.

Workflow

  1. Extract the CV text and save it as original_cv.txt. Read the job advert.
  2. Work out what matters: must-haves, duties, keywords. If the job-match-analyzer skill has already run in this conversation, reuse its analysis.
  3. Rewrite, following references/cv-writing.md, the relevant section of references/career-tracks.md, and the region in references/regions.md (default UK & Ireland):
    • Headline: the target role plus 2–3 of the candidate's strongest relevant themes.
    • Summary: 3–4 specific sentences with signature results. No "results-driven".
    • Skills: 2–4 labelled groups, using the advert's terms where true.
    • Experience: keep every role and date. Put the most relevant bullets first. Each bullet is: strong verb + what + how/scale + result.
    • Numbers: only the user's own. Otherwise use [placeholders] with needs_confirmation: true.
    • Log every change with the reason it helps.
  4. Save the result as output.json following references/output-schema.json. The analysis needs at least the keywords, and cover_letter may be minimal if not requested.
  5. Verify, and fix the output until the fabrication check is clean:
    python scripts/check_fabrication.py original_cv.txt output.json
    python scripts/ats_score.py --compare original_cv.txt output.json
  6. Build the Word file in the chosen template (classic, modern, executive or compact):
    python scripts/build_docx.py output.json --template classic --page a4
  7. Reply with:
    • the ATS score before → after
    • the most important changes and why
    • the placeholders to fill in
    • the file

Rules

  • Never invent or upgrade employers, titles, dates, tools, qualifications or results.
  • Never deliver a CV that fails check_fabrication.py.
  • Keep layouts ATS-safe: one column, standard headings, contact details in the body.

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.