원클릭으로 Manus에서 모든 스킬 실행

resume-panel

스타0

포크0

업데이트2026년 4월 19일 17:25

Fan out a 12-persona review panel against will_cygan_resume.typ in parallel, with work-experience/*.md supplied as the source-of-truth evidence base, and produce a consolidated dashboard with consensus verdict, dissent highlights, and deduplicated top issues. Use when the user wants a comprehensive multi-angle resume review, asks for a "panel review", "full review", "multi-angle review", or wants every reviewer to weigh in at once. Covers ATS parsing, recruiter triage, hiring manager, technical screener, bar raiser, staff IC peer, leveling committee, skip-level exec, domain SME, typography, future-self skeptic, and career coach perspectives.

설치

Codex 또는 Claude로 설치 이 Prompt를 복사해 Codex, Claude 또는 다른 어시스턴트에 붙여 넣으면 Skill 페이지를 검토하고 설치를 진행할 수 있습니다.

Manus에서 실행

출처

wcygan

wcygan/resume

GitHub 저장소 열기 Creator 저장소 보기

다운로드

Manus에서 실행

Resume Panel Review

Run a parallel fan-out of all 12 reviewer sub-agents defined in .claude/agents/ against will_cygan_resume.typ, with work-experience/*.md supplied as the evidence base, then synthesize their outputs into a single dashboard.

Source-of-truth hierarchy

Every reviewer must treat these three inputs with distinct roles. Brief them explicitly in the spawn prompt — do not assume the persona definition covers it.

will_cygan_resume.typ — the artifact under review. This is what recruiters, ATSs, and hiring managers actually see. All verdicts and line references land here.
work-experience/01-linkedin-swe.md and work-experience/02-linkedin-sr-swe.md — the source of truth for every LinkedIn role. Contains full Context / Role / Actions / Impact / Tech / Status logs and raw evidence for every claim. work-experience/99-personal-projects.md covers the Projects section. work-experience/ACRONYMS.md glosses LinkedIn-internal terms.
advice/*.md — methodology (STAR/XYZ, quantification, readability). Agents already know to cite these; you do not need to re-brief.

Reviewers must use (2) in three directions:

Inflation / under-support check. Any resume claim whose scope, number, or scale is not corroborated by work-experience/ is a flag. Example: a QPS, revenue, or row-count figure on the resume should match the work-experience entry; unverifiable numbers are a bar-raiser / future-self-skeptic issue.
Buried-lead check. Strong, well-quantified material in work-experience/ (especially high-RS projects) that is missing from, weakly represented on, or out-ranked by weaker material on will_cygan_resume.typ is a flag. This is usually a hiring-manager, skip-level-exec, staff-ic-peer, or career-coach issue.
Relevance Score calibration. Each project in work-experience/*.md carries a **Relevance:** N/5 — … field documented in work-experience/RELEVANCE.md. Use the score as a prior: RS 5/4 projects missing from the resume are high-priority buried leads; RS 2/1 projects on the resume are wasted real estate. If a reviewer disagrees with a score (inflated or under-rated), it must say so — the score is human judgment being calibrated against, not gospel.

Process

Fan out. In a single message, launch all 12 sub-agents in parallel using the Agent tool — one call per persona. Use the spawn prompt in REFERENCE.md § Spawn Prompt exactly as written; it encodes the source-of-truth hierarchy above.
Collect. As each returns, record its verdict, confidence, top issue, and line references in the summary table. Line refs land in will_cygan_resume.typ; evidence/counter-evidence citations land in work-experience/*.md.
Tally consensus. Count the verdicts across all 12. Identify the dominant verdict and any dissenters.
Highlight dissent. For each persona whose verdict disagrees with the majority, quote their strongest reason. Dissent is high-signal — surface it, don't average it away. If all 12 agree, say so explicitly.
Deduplicate issues. Merge top issues from all 12 into a ranked list of 10 max. Weight by cross-persona support (more personas raising the same issue = higher priority) and severity. A single strong technical-depth concern from domain-sme-systems — or a single well-evidenced buried-lead from hiring-manager citing a specific work-experience/ bullet — may still rank above a broader but shallower complaint.
Emit the dashboard. Use the output format in REFERENCE.md § Dashboard Format. The Consolidated Top Issues section must cite work-experience/ line refs whenever an issue is framed as inflation or a buried lead.

Notes

The 12 sub-agents are defined in .claude/agents/ and already know which /advice/*.md files to cite. You do not need to brief them on methodology — but you DO need to brief them on the source-of-truth hierarchy above, since most personas' own definitions do not reference work-experience/.
Expect sub-agent outputs to be noisy. Synthesize aggressively — 10 consolidated issues is the cap, not the target.
Recommend a follow-up skill or command at the end of the dashboard based on the consolidated issues (e.g., /resume-panel-focus, /resume-debate, or a tactical skill from resume-optimizer).

See REFERENCE.md for the full persona roster, the exact spawn prompt, and the output template.

이 저장소의 다른 Skills

같은 저장소

resume-debate

wcygan/resume

Structured 3-round debate about a single resume bullet. Runs hiring-manager, bar-raiser, and future-self-skeptic through opening critique, rebuttal, and rewrite rounds. Produces either a consensus rewrite or an articulated disagreement for the user to adjudicate. Accepts either the bullet text or a line number as $ARGUMENTS. Use when the user is uncertain about a specific bullet, asks "is this bullet good?", wants multiple perspectives on one line, or says a reviewer flagged a specific bullet.

2026-04-190

resume-interview-rehearsal

wcygan/resume

Generate a ranked interview prep sheet from the resume. Three interviewer personas (hiring-manager, bar-raiser, domain-sme-systems) each generate 5 questions they would ask based on specific resume bullets. The questions are then deduplicated and ranked by difficulty tier (softball, standard, hard, trap). Includes a coverage audit flagging bullets no persona asked about. Optionally accepts a job description as $ARGUMENTS to target the questions for a specific role. Use when the user has an interview coming up, asks for interview prep, or wants to rehearse what they'd be asked about their resume.

2026-04-190

resume-optimizer

wcygan/resume

Optimize engineering resumes using proven STAR/XYZ methodologies, ATS best practices, and hiring manager insights. Use when reviewing resumes, improving bullet points, tailoring to job descriptions, or enhancing professional presentation. Keywords: resume, CV, bullet points, STAR, XYZ, ATS, job description, optimize, tailor, action verbs, quantify, achievements

2026-04-190

resume-panel-focus

wcygan/resume

Run a section-focused resume review panel. Routes to a curated subset of the 12 reviewer sub-agents based on the section argument (work-experience, skills, projects, formatting, narrative, or header). Faster and more targeted than a full panel — uses 3-6 relevant personas instead of all 12. Use when the user wants to review only a specific part of their resume, has just edited one section, or asks about one area like "the skills section" or "the formatting" or "my bullets".

2026-04-190

extraction-check

wcygan/resume

ATS text-extraction regression gate for the resume repo. Runs the compiled PDF through three open-source parsers (pdftotext, pdftotext -layout, Apache Tika) that real ATSs actually use, asserts clean extraction across nine structural checks, and surfaces disagreement between parsers as diagnostic signal. Use when the user asks about ATS parseability, text extraction, PDF parsing reliability, whether a resume variant breaks for ATSs, how the extraction gate works, running or debugging extraction-check, comparing extractor outputs, adding assertions, writing new broken fixtures, interpreting cross-extractor disagreement, or the text-extraction hypothesis at .claude/context/text-extraction-hypothesis.md. Keywords ATS, applicant tracking system, text extraction, PDF parsing, pdftotext, poppler, tika, Apache Tika, reading order, mojibake, cross-extractor, extraction check, regression gate, resume parser, parseability, soft hyphen, url dedup.

2026-04-150

typst-vendor

wcygan/resume

Vendor @preview Typst packages into template/ or bootstrap new in-house Typst templates from scratch. Use when the user asks to vendor, fork, copy, pin, localize, or maintain a Typst template; when a @preview package breaks on a newer typst version; when creating a new template.typ from scratch; or says things like "vendor modern-cv", "fork this typst package", "bring this template in-repo", "write our own resume template". Keywords typst, vendor, fork, @preview, template, modern-cv, fontawesome, linguify, typst.toml, lib.typ, MIT attribution, version drift.

2026-04-150

name	resume-panel
description	Fan out a 12-persona review panel against will_cygan_resume.typ in parallel, with work-experience/*.md supplied as the source-of-truth evidence base, and produce a consolidated dashboard with consensus verdict, dissent highlights, and deduplicated top issues. Use when the user wants a comprehensive multi-angle resume review, asks for a "panel review", "full review", "multi-angle review", or wants every reviewer to weigh in at once. Covers ATS parsing, recruiter triage, hiring manager, technical screener, bar raiser, staff IC peer, leveling committee, skip-level exec, domain SME, typography, future-self skeptic, and career coach perspectives.
allowed-tools	Read, Grep, Glob, Agent

Resume Panel Review

Source-of-truth hierarchy

Every reviewer must treat these three inputs with distinct roles. Brief them explicitly in the spawn prompt — do not assume the persona definition covers it.

will_cygan_resume.typ — the artifact under review. This is what recruiters, ATSs, and hiring managers actually see. All verdicts and line references land here.
work-experience/01-linkedin-swe.md and work-experience/02-linkedin-sr-swe.md — the source of truth for every LinkedIn role. Contains full Context / Role / Actions / Impact / Tech / Status logs and raw evidence for every claim. work-experience/99-personal-projects.md covers the Projects section. work-experience/ACRONYMS.md glosses LinkedIn-internal terms.
advice/*.md — methodology (STAR/XYZ, quantification, readability). Agents already know to cite these; you do not need to re-brief.

Reviewers must use (2) in three directions:

Inflation / under-support check. Any resume claim whose scope, number, or scale is not corroborated by work-experience/ is a flag. Example: a QPS, revenue, or row-count figure on the resume should match the work-experience entry; unverifiable numbers are a bar-raiser / future-self-skeptic issue.
Buried-lead check. Strong, well-quantified material in work-experience/ (especially high-RS projects) that is missing from, weakly represented on, or out-ranked by weaker material on will_cygan_resume.typ is a flag. This is usually a hiring-manager, skip-level-exec, staff-ic-peer, or career-coach issue.
Relevance Score calibration. Each project in work-experience/*.md carries a **Relevance:** N/5 — … field documented in work-experience/RELEVANCE.md. Use the score as a prior: RS 5/4 projects missing from the resume are high-priority buried leads; RS 2/1 projects on the resume are wasted real estate. If a reviewer disagrees with a score (inflated or under-rated), it must say so — the score is human judgment being calibrated against, not gospel.

Process

Fan out. In a single message, launch all 12 sub-agents in parallel using the Agent tool — one call per persona. Use the spawn prompt in REFERENCE.md § Spawn Prompt exactly as written; it encodes the source-of-truth hierarchy above.
Collect. As each returns, record its verdict, confidence, top issue, and line references in the summary table. Line refs land in will_cygan_resume.typ; evidence/counter-evidence citations land in work-experience/*.md.
Tally consensus. Count the verdicts across all 12. Identify the dominant verdict and any dissenters.
Highlight dissent. For each persona whose verdict disagrees with the majority, quote their strongest reason. Dissent is high-signal — surface it, don't average it away. If all 12 agree, say so explicitly.
Deduplicate issues. Merge top issues from all 12 into a ranked list of 10 max. Weight by cross-persona support (more personas raising the same issue = higher priority) and severity. A single strong technical-depth concern from domain-sme-systems — or a single well-evidenced buried-lead from hiring-manager citing a specific work-experience/ bullet — may still rank above a broader but shallower complaint.
Emit the dashboard. Use the output format in REFERENCE.md § Dashboard Format. The Consolidated Top Issues section must cite work-experience/ line refs whenever an issue is framed as inflation or a buried lead.

Notes

The 12 sub-agents are defined in .claude/agents/ and already know which /advice/*.md files to cite. You do not need to brief them on methodology — but you DO need to brief them on the source-of-truth hierarchy above, since most personas' own definitions do not reference work-experience/.
Expect sub-agent outputs to be noisy. Synthesize aggressively — 10 consolidated issues is the cap, not the target.
Recommend a follow-up skill or command at the end of the dashboard based on the consolidated issues (e.g., /resume-panel-focus, /resume-debate, or a tactical skill from resume-optimizer).

See REFERENCE.md for the full persona roster, the exact spawn prompt, and the output template.