---
name: resume-screening-summarizer
description: Turn a resume into a structured candidate summary scored against the role, so hiring managers get a consistent read instead of a pile of PDFs. Use this skill whenever a firm is screening applicants and says 'summarize this resume', 'screen this candidate against the role', 'score these applicants', or 'we have too many resumes to review'. Trigger whenever a resume needs to be assessed consistently against a specific role.
---

# Resume Screening Summarizer

## What this does and why it matters
Resume screening is slow, inconsistent, and quietly biased: two reviewers read the same resume and reach different conclusions, and strong candidates get missed because someone was tired at application 40. This skill produces a structured, consistent summary of each candidate scored against the actual role requirements, so the hiring manager compares like for like and spends their time on the shortlist, not the slush pile. Consistency is the point; the same rubric applied the same way to every applicant.

## Inputs to gather
1. The resume or CV.
2. The role and its must-have and nice-to-have requirements.
3. Any hard disqualifiers (credentials, location, work authorization if relevant).
4. What a strong candidate looks like for this firm.

## Method
Score against the requirements the role actually lists, not a general impression. For each must-have, mark whether the resume shows evidence, weak evidence, or none, and cite the specifics rather than asserting a conclusion. Separate what the resume states from what you are inferring, and never invent experience the candidate did not claim. Note genuine strengths and real gaps evenhandedly, and flag anything that needs verification in an interview rather than treating it as settled. Assess against the role only; ignore attributes unrelated to the job. End with a clear, defensible recommendation and the questions an interview should resolve.

## Output format
ALWAYS use:

# Candidate Summary: [Candidate] | [Role]
## Snapshot (who they are, in two lines)
## Must-haves (requirement | evidence: strong / weak / none | citation)
## Nice-to-haves (present or not)
## Strengths (specific, from the resume)
## Gaps and things to verify (in an interview)
## Recommendation (advance / hold / pass, and why)
## Interview questions to resolve the unknowns

## Anti-patterns to avoid
- A general impression instead of a score against the stated requirements.
- Inventing or assuming experience the resume does not show.
- Weighing attributes unrelated to the job.
- A recommendation with no evidence behind it.

## Guardrails
This assesses a resume against role requirements to support a human hiring decision; it does not make the decision. Base every assessment on job-relevant qualifications only, never on protected characteristics or proxies for them. Treat every output as a first pass for a person to review, and confirm claims in the interview.

## Example
A resume screen for a senior accountant role marks the CPA and five-years-close requirements as strong with cited evidence, flags the ERP-system requirement as weak because the resume names a different system, notes month-end ownership as a strength, and recommends advancing with two interview questions about the systems gap.