coverage-audit

Stars2

Forks0

UpdatedJune 25, 2026 at 02:50

Generate the STEP 2 coverage analysis for a drafted application document — mapping the draft against every section of the source materials (candidate information pack, position description, advertisement, selection criteria, recruiter requests, 'About You' / 'Key Accountabilities' / 'Capabilities' sections) and marking each Addressed / Partially Addressed / Not Addressed with the supporting evidence-bank entry IDs. Use this skill immediately after any application draft is finalised (cover letter, statement of claims, targeted pitch, selection criteria response, recruiter response) — STEP 2 is mandatory for every application-drafting session. Also use when [Candidate First Name] asks 'how well does this cover the PD', 'coverage analysis', 'what did we miss', or 'map the draft to the criteria'. Produces the Step 2 deliverable tables directly.

Installation

Install with Codex or Claude Copy this prompt, paste it into Codex, Claude, or another assistant, and let it review the skill page and install it for you.

Source

dudarenok-maker

dudarenok-maker/executive-application-helper

View GitHub Repository View Creator Repositories

Download

Related occupationsSOC

Based on SOC occupation classification

Human Resources SpecialistsBusiness and Financial Operations Occupations·SOC 13-1071

File Explorer

2 files

SKILL.md

readonly

name

coverage-audit

description

Coverage Audit — STEP 2 verification skill

Codifies STEP 2 (coverage analysis) of Project_Instructions.md (rev 2026-06-12). Wave 3 verification skill of the framework.

This skill produces the supplementary analysis showing how well the drafted response addresses the source materials. It runs after the draft is final (post length-check and watchouts-sweep), because coverage is assessed against delivered text, not an intermediate draft.

When to invoke

Default trigger: after STEP 1 closes on any application-drafting session — coverage analysis is mandatory, not optional.
Explicit triggers: "coverage analysis", "how well does this cover the PD", "what did we miss", "map the draft to the criteria".
Not applicable to interview prep (STEP 2 is an application-drafting step).

Inputs the skill needs

The final draft text (or file path in Submissions/).
All source materials provided this session — candidate information pack, position description, advertisement, recruiter requests, selection criteria.
The evidence-bank entry IDs used in the draft (from the Step 1 traceability list).

Method

Load references/coverage-method.md, then:

Enumerate the assessable sections across all provided materials: selection criteria; "About You" / "What We Are Looking For"; "Key Accountabilities"; "Key Challenges"; "Capabilities"; recruiter-specific requests; any equivalent section.
Map each section to the draft. Mark Addressed / Partially Addressed / Not Addressed; cite the draft passage and the supporting evidence-bank entry ID(s).
Surface the risk list: important requirements not strongly evidenced; areas where further examples would improve the application; wording in the draft that needs strengthening or sharpening.
Feed STEP 4: any gap that traces to missing bank evidence (rather than drafting choice) is named as a candidate evidence-bank capture for the post-draft maintenance report.

Output format

The STEP 2 deliverable: one table per source document (Section / Status / How covered + entry IDs / Gap or risk), followed by the consolidated risk list and the bank-gap candidates. Advisory by nature — coverage gaps inform the candidate's submit/strengthen decision; they do not block delivery.

More from this repository

same repository

bank-integrity-check

dudarenok-maker/executive-application-helper

Run a three-axis integrity check on the framework's evidence-bank files at the end of any session that touched the bank — Examples_Master.md, the Section 4/5/6/7 files, any Examples_Section_A/B/C/D companion file — plus the append-only files that actually truncate in practice: both changelogs (evidence-bank changelog + current weekly archive, instructions changelog) and the Project_Instructions file. Use at post-draft maintenance (STEP 4) before the maintenance report, OR when the candidate says 'check the bank', 'integrity check', or 'make sure I didn't break anything'. Mechanical (~30–60 sec via bash + grep); catches three failure modes that otherwise go undetected for weeks: end-of-file truncation, cross-reference breakage, and silent line-count drops.

2026-06-252

candidate-voice

dudarenok-maker/executive-application-helper

Apply the candidate's executive voice and style — written or spoken — or audit existing material against it. Use this skill any time you are (a) drafting, rewriting, sharpening or reviewing prose the candidate will send or sign (emails, cover letters, statements of claims, briefings); (b) preparing for or rehearsing an interview the candidate will sit (recruiter screens, behavioural panels, executive panels — including STAR-style prep documents and opening scripts); or (c) generating an interview-prep document using the framework's eight-section template. Also use when the candidate asks to 'make this sharper / more like me / in my voice' or for a critique, audit or tone review of any writing. Default to invoking this skill rather than freelancing on voice, tone or interview-prep structure.

2026-06-252

capability-mapping-check

dudarenok-maker/executive-application-helper

Verify that a panel brief for an SES or equivalent senior role contains a complete capability mapping section before delivery — all framework capability groups mapped per question, Strong/Adequate/Watch ratings on every cell, a named pivot story for every Watch, an overall coverage matrix, a values/behaviours cross-frame, and the cumulative-impression reminder. Use this skill whenever a panel or executive-panel brief for an APS SES role (or a state-government / board-level equivalent scored against a formal capability framework such as the ILS) is about to be saved to Interview Prep/ or delivered. Also use when [Candidate First Name] asks 'check the capability mapping', 'is the ILS coverage complete', or 'run the mapping check'. The check is mechanical (~30–60 sec) and catches the panel-prep failure mode where coverage thins on one capability and no pivot story exists when the panel probes it.

2026-06-252

length-check

dudarenok-maker/executive-application-helper

Verify that a drafted application document complies with the framework's word-count and character-count discipline before delivery — document-type word bands, any matrix-row or brief-stated override, and (critically) per-question hard character limits on job-platform screening questions (e.g. Seek's 1,000 characters per question, which the platform truncates silently). Use whenever a draft is about to be saved to Submissions/ or presented as final output. Also use when the candidate asks to 'check the length', 'count words', or 'is this within the limit'. Mechanical (~5–10 sec per document).

2026-06-252

matrix-row-traceability

dudarenok-maker/executive-application-helper

Confirm that a drafted application document actually follows the prescription of its matched evidence-bank matrix row — every B-ID in the row's body stack is reflected in the draft, the dominant A-ID positioning leads, the template and length band match, and the fit-acknowledgment style and AI register are honoured. Use this skill at Step 1 close on any application-drafting session where a matrix row was matched (cite by ID), alongside length-check and watchouts-sweep. Also use when [Candidate First Name] asks 'did we follow the row', 'trace the draft to the matrix', or 'is this on-prescription'. Catches prescription drift: a draft that silently swapped the row's tested body stack for ad-hoc evidence selection, losing the calibration the row encodes.

2026-06-252

pace-audit

dudarenok-maker/executive-application-helper

Run an honest timing audit on the spoken responses in the candidate's interview-prep documents, at the candidate's actual measured speaking pace — never at the generic 165 wpm executive baseline. Use this skill whenever a speaking-notes addendum or prep document with spoken responses is about to be delivered, AND after every content reshape or tightening pass (timing drifts with every edit). Also use when [Candidate First Name] asks 'how long does this run', 'time these responses', 'am I over budget', or 'run the pace check'. The audit is mechanical (~10–30 sec): word count ÷ actual wpm vs the format's time budget, with a two-pass tightening plan for any response that runs over.

2026-06-252

name

coverage-audit

description

Coverage Audit — STEP 2 verification skill

Codifies STEP 2 (coverage analysis) of Project_Instructions.md (rev 2026-06-12). Wave 3 verification skill of the framework.

When to invoke

Default trigger: after STEP 1 closes on any application-drafting session — coverage analysis is mandatory, not optional.
Explicit triggers: "coverage analysis", "how well does this cover the PD", "what did we miss", "map the draft to the criteria".
Not applicable to interview prep (STEP 2 is an application-drafting step).

Inputs the skill needs

The final draft text (or file path in Submissions/).
All source materials provided this session — candidate information pack, position description, advertisement, recruiter requests, selection criteria.
The evidence-bank entry IDs used in the draft (from the Step 1 traceability list).

Method

Load references/coverage-method.md, then:

Enumerate the assessable sections across all provided materials: selection criteria; "About You" / "What We Are Looking For"; "Key Accountabilities"; "Key Challenges"; "Capabilities"; recruiter-specific requests; any equivalent section.
Map each section to the draft. Mark Addressed / Partially Addressed / Not Addressed; cite the draft passage and the supporting evidence-bank entry ID(s).
Surface the risk list: important requirements not strongly evidenced; areas where further examples would improve the application; wording in the draft that needs strengthening or sharpening.
Feed STEP 4: any gap that traces to missing bank evidence (rather than drafting choice) is named as a candidate evidence-bank capture for the post-draft maintenance report.