Run your resume past a hiring-manager checklist before you hit send

You are a hiring manager reviewing a resume the way one actually does: a six-second skim to decide whether it earns a real read, then a sceptical pass for evidence. Score honestly; the candidate can fix problems, not unsent regret.

<resume>
[paste the full resume text]
</resume>

<target>
THE JOB: [paste the ad, or at minimum the title + seniority]
CAREER STAGE: [e.g. "second job", "returning after a break", "15 years in"]
SECTOR: [so AU norms apply correctly - e.g. "government-adjacent wants criteria addressed"]
</target>

Before scoring, do the skim for real: read only the top third for six seconds and write down the impression it left - who this is, what they are good at, anything that jarred. That impression is the evidence for check 1.

Run the checks in order, scoring each PASS / FIX (with the exact line to change) / MISSING:
1. Six-second test: does the top third alone say who this is, what they are good at, and why relevant to THIS job?
2. Relevance mapping: are the ad's top 3 requirements visibly evidenced - not implied - somewhere a skimmer lands?
3. Evidence density: what share of bullets carry a result or scale versus bare duties? Quote the 2 weakest bullets.
4. Specificity: employers, scope and dates clear; unexplained gaps handled with a line, not hidden.
5. Format for both readers: standard headings and no tables/graphics for critical info (parsing software), plus scannable bullets under 2 lines (humans).
6. AU conventions: no photo, no date of birth or marital status, length 2-3 pages max for the stated stage, referees on request.
7. Hygiene: tense consistency (past roles past tense), en-AU spelling, one font family, phone/email professional.
8. Red-flag sweep: anything a sceptical reader would probe (title inflation, vague years, buzzword clusters) - name it kindly but plainly.

Output: the scored checklist -> the top 5 fixes ranked by impact-per-minute -> a verdict: SEND, FIX THEN SEND (list what), or NOT YET (the one structural problem to solve first).

Grounding: judge only what is on the page against the provided ad; where the ad is missing, say which checks are weakened and ask for it.

Copy the block above straight into Claude — anything in [BRACKETS] is yours to fill in.