Improve
Make the performance work concrete
The reader cannot tell which tool changed, what Alex implemented, or how performance was evaluated.
Example review. Fictional CV and illustrative scores. No model call was made.
REVIEW RESULTS
Clarify eligibilityAlex Morgan.
Graduate Software Engineer · Meridian
Overall score
77/100
Documented fit + CV quality77/ 100
CV quality
74/100
How clearly the CV presents evidenceEvidence coverage
67%
Requirements with a cited CV passageRole fit
78/100
Evidence for this role’s requirementsAlex Morgan · example CV
ALEX MORGAN Software Engineer alex@example.com · Bristol, UK · github.com/example PROFILE Computer Science graduate building thoughtful software for real-world problems. Strong analytical skills and a passion for reliable systems. EXPERIENCE Northstar Labs · Software Engineering Intern Jun 2024 – Sep 2024 Built a Python validation service that checked 120,000 daily records against 12 business rules. Worked on improving the performance of internal tools. Collaborated with the engineering team on new features. SELECTED PROJECTS Transit Monitor · TypeScript, React, PostgreSQL Built a dashboard that tracks service disruptions across 6 transit routes, with a PostgreSQL data pipeline and automated integration tests. Responsible for the frontend and backend. EDUCATION University of Bristol BSc Computer Science · Sep 2021 – Jun 2024 Final project: anomaly detection in transport data. SKILLS Python, TypeScript, React, PostgreSQL, Docker, Kubernetes, Git English: fluent
THE ASSESSMENT
Your application, assessed.
The CV demonstrates a relevant degree, practical Python and TypeScript work, and automated testing. Two vague experience bullets obscure the contribution. Work permission is not established by the document and should be clarified separately.
Eligibility UnconfirmedSubmission rules Unconfirmed
Where to focus
Improve
Clarify your individual contribution
The project describes useful functionality, but this bullet adds little about the implementation Alex owned.
What is working
Concrete engineering scope
Daily record volume and validation rules make the internship work understandable.
Testing within a real project
The dashboard connects implementation with an explicit testing method.
Score breakdown
Evidence & specificity6.5/10
The validation and transit projects are specific; two experience bullets need an identifiable contribution.
Relevance & prioritisation8/10
The selected work supports a graduate engineering application.
Clarity & structure8/10
Education, work and projects are easy to distinguish in the extracted text.
Presentation & readability7/10
The text has clear headings. The example has no rendered PDF, so visual layout is not assessed.
Consistency & credibility7/10
Most technologies are demonstrated, but deployment tools are listed without supporting work.
Language & polish8.5/10
The language is readable; generic self-description takes space from concrete evidence.
Scores assess the CV, not your chances of being hired.
Worth clarifying
- 01Is UK work permission already held?
- 02What was the personal contribution to improving the internal tools?
Visual review not performed. This fictional example uses text, not rendered PDF pages.