Back to Details

cowork-hiring-screener

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English
🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

Cowork Hiring Screener

Cowork招聘筛选工具

Screen a resume pile the way a disciplined recruiter does: score against the written requirements, cite evidence from the resume for every score, and never let formatting quality masquerade as candidate quality. Input is a folder of resumes (PDF, .docx, text) and a job description; output is a defensible shortlist.
像严谨的招聘专员那样筛选简历堆：根据书面要求打分，为每一项分数引用简历中的依据，绝不允许格式质量伪装成候选人质量。输入为一个包含简历（PDF、.docx、文本格式）的文件夹和一份职位描述；输出为一份可辩护的候选短名单。

Workflow

工作流程

  1. Extract requirements. Parse the JD into must-haves, nice-to-haves, and disqualifiers. Present the rubric for approval before scoring -- the human may reweight. If the JD is vague ("rockstar", "wears many hats"), ask what actually matters before proceeding.
  2. Inventory. Catalog every file in the folder. Flag unreadable files, duplicate submissions, and non-resume documents. Report the candidate count before starting.
  3. Score each candidate against the rubric: 0-3 per must-have and nice-to-have, with a direct resume quote or specific experience justifying every non-zero score. No quote, no points.
  4. Rank and tier. Produce 
    screening-report.md
    : Tier 1 (interview now), Tier 2 (backup), Tier 3 (decline), each candidate with score breakdown, one-paragraph summary, strongest signal, and biggest gap or open question.
  5. Draft communications. Advance emails for Tier 1 (with 2-3 proposed interview slots if calendar tools are connected) and respectful decline drafts for Tier 3. Drafts only -- never send.
  6. Interview kits. For each Tier 1 candidate, generate 5-6 questions probing their specific gaps and claims -- "Your resume says you led the Series B data migration; walk me through the hardest call you made" -- not generic behavioral questions. Hand off to 
    hiring-scorecard
    for structured interview evaluation.
  1. 提取要求：将职位描述（JD）解析为必备要求、加分要求和淘汰项。在打分前展示评分标准供审批——人工可重新调整权重。若职位描述（JD）模糊（如“明星员工”“多面手”），则在继续前询问实际关注的要点。
  2. 清点整理：列出文件夹中的所有文件。标记无法读取的文件、重复提交的材料和非简历文档。在开始打分前报告候选人数量。
  3. 为每位候选人打分：对照评分标准，对每项必备要求和加分要求给出0-3分，每项非零分数都需附上简历原文引用或具体经历作为依据。无引用则不得分。
  4. 排名分层：生成
    screening-report.md
    文件：分为Tier 1（立即面试）、Tier 2（备选）、Tier 3（淘汰），每位候选人都包含分数明细、一段总结、最突出优势以及最大差距或待确认问题。
  5. 撰写沟通草稿：为Tier 1候选人撰写录用邮件草稿（若连接了日历工具则附上2-3个建议面试时段），为Tier 3候选人撰写礼貌的拒绝邮件草稿。仅生成草稿——绝不自动发送。
  6. 面试工具包：为每位Tier 1候选人生成5-6个问题，探查他们的具体差距和自述经历——例如“你的简历显示你主导了B轮融资的数据迁移；请告诉我你做出的最艰难的决策是什么”——而非通用行为问题。将工具包移交至
    hiring-scorecard
    进行结构化面试评估。

Rules

规则

  • Score the content, not the polish. A plain resume with strong evidence outranks a designed one with vague claims.
  • Never infer or use protected characteristics (age, gender, ethnicity, family status, graduation years as an age proxy). Score skills and experience only.
  • Distinguish "did the thing" from "was near the thing." "Led migration" and "team migrated during my tenure" are different scores.
  • Flag inconsistencies (date overlaps, title inflation between sections) as open questions, not disqualifiers.
  • Keep every scoring decision auditable: the report must let a hiring manager disagree with specifics, not vibes.
  • If the pile exceeds 100 resumes, do a hard-disqualifier pass first and report how many were cut and why before deep-scoring the rest.
  • 依据内容打分，而非排版质量。内容扎实的朴素简历排名优于内容空洞的精美简历。
  • 绝不推断或使用受保护特征（年龄、性别、种族、家庭状况、将毕业年份作为年龄参考）。仅针对技能和经验打分。
  • 区分“亲自完成”与“参与相关项目”。“主导迁移”和“任职期间团队完成迁移”对应不同分数。
  • 将不一致情况（日期重叠、不同部分的职称夸大）标记为待确认问题，而非淘汰项。
  • 确保每一项打分决策可审计：报告必须让招聘经理能够针对具体内容提出异议，而非仅凭感觉。
  • 若简历数量超过100份，先进行淘汰项筛选，报告淘汰人数及原因后，再对剩余简历进行深度打分。

Quick Commands

快捷命令

  • "Screen [folder] against [JD]" -- full workflow
  • "Just the rubric" -- step 1 only, for approval
  • "Top 5 only" -- deep-score and report only the strongest candidates
  • "Draft the declines" -- Tier 3 communication drafts
  • “对[文件夹]中的简历按照[职位描述]进行筛选”——执行完整工作流程
  • “仅生成评分标准”——仅执行步骤1，供审批
  • “仅筛选前5名”——仅对最优秀的候选人进行深度打分并生成报告
  • “撰写拒绝邮件草稿”——生成Tier 3的沟通草稿